Why would Scots want Independence when England seems awash with people who share your attitude towards them? It's a real head scratcher.
I have no idea but Sir Ian wood is merely regurgitating the same lies we've been fed since oil was discovered, you have heard of the McCrone report? In summary if he (or any of the other conservative lickspittles who have been rolled out to support the status quo) told me it was September i'd check my calender. Twice.
We will have to agree to disagree. I have already supplied other links that concur more with Wood's opinion, than Salmond's hugely optimistic projections. The fact is that newsnetscotland is a blatantly obvious nationalist mouthpiece.
And Ian Wood is not a Tory mouthpiece? Please. “The oil will run out by 1994.” (Labour MP Tony Benn, May 1979) “The oil will run out by 2000.” (Labour MP Ioan Evans, February 1980) “Oil and gas will run out by the end of the 1980s.” (Tory MPs Timothy Eggart and Peter Ross, January 1982) “Oil will be running out by 1989.” (Labour MP Jeff Rooker, April 1984) “The UK Government has spent 30 years suppressing its own report telling the Scots how rich oil would make them with independence.” (The Independent, December 2005) - “Norway’s oil fund grew by 18% in 2012 to £450bn.” (BBC News, March 2013) - “Alistair Darling is pocketing an extra £13m A DAY thanks to soaring oil prices.” (The Sun, April 2008) North Sea oil could run out by 2018.” (The Guardian, May 2008) “North Sea oil will last another 100 years.” (The Telegraph, June 2008) “High oil and gas prices could lead to a Treasury tax windfall.” (Alistair Darling on BBC News, June 2008) “Soaring oil prices could hold back the economic recovery.” (Alistair Darling in the Evening Standard, June 2009) “Collapsing oil revenue will turn the whole UK into a banana republic!” (The Telegraph, November 2009) “Scotland faces bill of £30bn after North Sea oil runs out.” (The Scotsman, April 2012) “North Sea oil will last for another 50 years.” (Daily Express, September 2012) “Declining oil revenue will leave Scotland worse off than the UK.” (The Telegraph, November 2012) “The trouble with oil is that it’s a tremendously volatile diminishing asset.” (Alistair Darling in the Paisley Daily Express, December 2012) “Oil and gas decline to halt as investment booms.” (Reuters, January 2013) “North Sea oil to give George Osborne £25bn boost.” (The Telegraph, February 2013) “It’s not Scotland’s oil, it’s Shetland’s.” (Tavish Scott in The Shetland Times, March 2013) “It’s definitely Scotland’s oil.” (Vince Cable in The Telegraph, March 2013) “Falling oil revenues will mean savage public spending cuts or tax rises.” (Vince Cable in the Scotsman, March 2013) “Oil and gas will play a vital role in British energy needs for decades to come.” (Vince Cable in the Daily Record, March 2013) “There are probably billions of barrels still to be found in Scottish waters, which is why we’re investing billions of pounds in looking for it.” (New York Times, March 2013) “Oil revenue is volatile, and declining, and cheap gas from fracking will probably make it completely worthless.” (The Scotsman, March 2013) “North Sea oil and gas have a long and bright future.” (UK energy minister John Hayes, March 2013) “There’s no bright future for oil revenue.” (Dumfries And Galloway Standard, March 2013) “Analysts believe that Clair, along with other developments [in Scottish waters to the west of Shetland], could lead to the Atlantic overtaking the North Sea as the UK’s biggest oil-producing region within 20 years.” (BBC News, March 2013) “Scotland will be so rich from oil you won’t be able to handle it by yourselves!” (The Telegraph, March 2013) Who to believe eh?
Exactly. It is more than the point of proven remaining reserves. It's a matter of economically recoverable reserves. The fracking issue also comes into it. At the moment, the cost of extraction by that method is high. However, there are untold reserves. If extraction methods become more efficient, as they may well do, the price of oil could be far lower than current projections. The point is, it's all conjecture. Nobody really knows - there are too many unpredictable issues. Yet Salmond wants the Scottish people to bet their future on his projections. Which again, are considered wildly optimistic by the vast majority of experts.
I have to laugh NSIS yes we have newsnetscotland and wingsoverscotland. The establishment have the BBC, The Telegraph oh I am not going to list them the whole of the media except possibly Murdoch who has decided to get revenge over Westminster. We are allowed a couple of sources to present our side NSIS , be fair.
We've had scare stories before is what i've proven, wild estimates which have been shown to be lies. If various people had not been crying Wolf for 40 years I may have believed them but as it stands i'm more likely to trust Salmond than I am Milliband, Cameron, Clegg or Farage. As I said on another thread, I can't help but ask why - if we are such a drain on financial resources - do the leaders of the 3 main parties want to keep us in the Union. Surely if England, Wales and NI will be better off financially then the obvious decision would be to cast us adrift? If people really believe Cameron, Clegg and Milliband have only the best of interests of Scotland at heart they should vote No.
No he doesn't, Scotland is perfectly viable with out oil. Who are you NSIS David Cameron? You completely argue the Establishment case, and there you are safely tucked away in sunny Spain, no you are bloody tax exile or Fred bloody Goodwin. Stop all this stuff that should not concern you and get funding the Spurs stadium. Come on NSIS make ENIC an offer.
Agreed on that one. I have no issue with Scotland or Scots, I have several good friends who are Scots. However, I honestly believe that Salmond & his SNP are leading both Scotland, and in the short term, the rest of the UK, down the road to a far poorer future. My mate Gordon, who doesn't live here permanently - he has a house here and comes over several times a year. You won't find a prouder and more patriotic Scot, but he has voted No. As he said, the idea is appealing, but there are too many unanswered questions.
My 10 year old son can't believe Gazza played for Rangers. I'm against it not for political/ideological/social reasons, but for pragmatic and economic ones. The "yes" voters have a very rose-tinted view of the future. The banks, big businesses and the Westminster government will scupper the well intentioned plans.
AS the powers that be are dredging up all the old stories today, let's join them, Remember this: http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/fury-tory-party-donors-handed-3123469 This is what we need to break up.
I am no lover of Cameron. All this country needs is another ****ing old Etonian tosser. However, whatever Salmond would have you believe, Scotland is not viable without the oil. Virtually all of the SNP's economic projections are based on a) the hotly disputed remaining amount of oil, and b) it's future price. I assume you mean the Fred Goodwin who helped bankrupt the RBS? The RBS that would no longer exist if it weren't for that lender of last resort, the BOE. Make ENIC a bid? Well, if I had that sort of money, I would look into it. However, I would do my own financial projections - based on actuality, and mildly pessimistic future projections of revenue, etc. any bid I made would only be predicated on that basis. That basis alone. I certainly would not risk my entire future on over optimistic projections.
He seriously considered the issue. He's an intelligent man. He made his decision on facts - not on anything else. Had all the important issues been answered to his satisfaction, I believe he would have voted Yes.
Well seeing as how you seem keen on generalisations perhaps you can tell which of my views are a very rose-tinted view of the future? No one's promised me a garden of Eden or streets paved with gold, I - like many in the Yes camp = want a change amd it's not going to come under a Tory or a Labour led Government because they have been an abject failure for over 30 years. We are fully aware that it's not going to be a walk in the park but it's a risk we are willing to take, just like the pioneering spirit shown by our forebears we have to branch out on our own if we want to discover new horizons that will benefit us and us alone, that's only fair when we will be the the ones who took the risk.
And people in the Yes camp are different how...in your opinion? Let me guess, none of the people who are voting Yes have thought this through, we lowly plebians have bought the hype or been brainwashed by promises of a brave new world? Please don't be so condescending, as you would have known had you followed this debate at a closer distance, we don't like that.
Scotland is integrated with the UK economically/financially/politically/socially etc. The noises made by banks and big businesses should tell you that there will be serious adverse consequences from independence which can't just be brushed aside as irrelevant. It's a nice idea, but not a practical one.
